Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

The BBC can never win in these situations.

If they had spent the money that was asked for Bake Off, then many people (and certain media outlets) would complain that the BBC were spending 'their' money on 'rubbish', it wasn't cost effective, or as the government said at one point that the BBC shouldn't be doing popular shows anyway.

If they don't spend the money they're accused of letting decent programmes go.

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

To go with the sub par programming soon people will have to endure sub par presenters on them to simply because of their skin colour, gender or disability rather than any specific ability to present.

---------- Post added at 08:43 ---------- Previous post was at 08:41 ----------

Perhaps if they weren't spending so much cash on payoffs they'd have a bit left for programmes

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dai...android-h3g-gb

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

As that's a Daily Mail article, I don't expect it to be balanced when it comes to the BBC

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

Try this

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...-face-mps-live

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

I agree with what you are saying but I think this is an exception. I thought it was one of their top progs but I didn't realise it was "the" top prog. They have got to justify spending their money on something and if it isn't their most highly rated series then what should it be? If they are going to force people to pay for a service then they need to provide what the viewers want.

I hate to draw this comparison because I don't think they compare at all but this whole situation makes me thing of Sky One 10 years ago with Lost and 24 etc and Sky Atlantic now. If you want a premium service you pay a premium price and Sky One advertised 24 as airing 1 day after the States (which was huge at the time :) and obviously things have caught up now and I think Sky Atlantic airs GoT in real time. Sky are a broadcaster who realise that people are choosing to pay for a service and they make sure they deliver on the expectation of quality and standards. The BBC has once again shown that they just do whatever they want, get away with it and there isn't anything you can do to express your frustration about their bad decisions. It isn't as if you can decide to stop giving them money. Just think, if they were that **** that everyone went to ITV and Channel they wouldn't care because they would still sit there happy knowing they are going to get our money regardless.

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

Interesting, they lost Top Gear (well the ratings at least) now Bake Off, what's next Dr Who?

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

They didn't lose Top Gear. The BBC still own the format. Same for Doctor Who

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

They may own the name for top gear but they have lost the audience and the revenue. :)

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

The problem for the BBC is simple. If they don't pay enough, they lose the programmes, and get criticised for it. If they do, they are criticised for paying too much.

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

You're comparing three different things.

In the case of Top Gear, a programme the BBC wholly owns, they sacked the presenter then gave the gig to someone who, it turned out, was too scared to do anything other than copy Clarkson (badly).

In the case of Bake Off, a brand and format owned by Love Productions, the BBC was not willing to pay what the owner wished to charge for a licence for the BBC to keep using its intellectual property.

In the case of Doctor Who ... well most of it is owned by the BBC, certainly enough for them to keep making it as long as they want to. In this case, they have a very long history of replacing the main cast and the production team without killing it. So there's no reason to suppose it's going anywhere.

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

Well after Who went off air in 89. The BBC kept publishing books and stuff. Then they brought it back in 2005.

So they very much own the show.

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

The voice I think it's called

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

They own the name and the principal characters. A lot of the universe, they don't actually own, due to the way rights were allocated to scriptwriters during the classic era. The Terry Nation Estate, for example, owns the Daleks and a substantial chunk of what comes with them (Skaro, Thals, Davros).

Befor they brought the series back in 2005 they had to reacquire certain rights they had optioned out (there was a movie stuck in development hell for most of the time it was off air). I have heard - though I don't know if it's true - that they have had to buy a licence to use the theme tune.

So yes, they can make Doctor Who whenever they like, but to make it exactly the way we expect it to be is slightly more involved than you might think.

---------- Post added at 19:36 ---------- Previous post was at 19:35 ----------

The Voice went exactly the same way as Bake Off. The format owner (Endemol in this case) wanted a hefty chunk more money to renew the Beeb's licence to use it.

Re: BBC license change to cover catchup
 

Is that why your shed's full of old microwave oven parts? :D